9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ake a view different from the one taken in the earlier application. There must be change in the fact situation or in law which requires the earlier view being interfered with or where the earlier finding has become obsolete. Detailed discussion of the evidence and elaborate documentation on the merits of the case is to be avoided while considering an application for bail. No party should have the impression that his case has been pre-judged. Existence of a prima facie case is only to be considered. Where the offence is of serious nature, the question of grant of bail has to be decided mainly keeping in view the nature and gravity of the accusation, character of the evidence, chance of absconding of the accused, chance of tampering with the evidence and also the larger interest of the public. This bail application, being a successive one moved within two months of the rejection of the earlier bail application before the learned trial Court without any changed circumstances and after its rejection, the petitioner has rushed to this Court again, the petitioner cannot be released on bail. The application for bail stands rejected. - BLAPL No. 8126 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 2-8-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring course of investigation, S.I. of police Sri R.K. Biswal, the Investigating Officer examined the informant Bijayini Mishra, her brother Bhabani Shankar Mishra and others and recorded their statements and finding prima facie materials against the petitioner, the I.O. arrested the petitioner on 22.07.2019 and during interrogation, the petitioner confessed his guilt and disclosed that he strangulated the neck of deceased by means of a towel and killed her brutally and buried her dead body at Mahulmunda side and after the occurrence, he left the village and resided at Jharsuguda area for three years and then he was residing at Jujomura since one year. The I.O. sent a requisition to S.D.M., Sambalpur to depute an Executive Magistrate to disinter the dead body of the deceased from the spot. He also made a requisition to the Scientific Officer, DFSL, Sambalpur to assist in the collection of physical evidence with videographer. As per version of petitioner, the I.O. proceeded to village Badsinghari, Mahulmunda along with Executive Magistrate, scientific team and witnesses and searched for the dead body of deceased at all the possible places as per statement of the petitioner but found ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gation, the I.O. received some reliable information that, the marriage between Dinesh Pandey and Purnima Mishra who is eldest sister of informant Bijayini Mishra was held on 23.06.2011 and deceased was found missing since 09.06.2011. The I.O. sent the exhibits to the Director, CDFD, Hyderabad for DNA profiling and for chemical examination and opinion, which could not be received till submission of chargesheet. The case was supervised by Dr. Kanwar Visal Singh, Superintendent of Police, Sambalpur and ultimately charge sheet was submitted on 16.11.2019 against the petitioner under sections 364, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently DNA profiling report was received from the Director, CDFD, Hyderabad in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Sambalpur on 20.02.2020 which indicated that the sources of exhibit A (occipital bone and broken parts of cervical vertebrae with soil remnants) and exhibit B (parietal bone fragment) did not yield any DNA profiles and therefore, no opinion could be furnished. 4. Mr. Devashis Panda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner who is aged about sixty years is in judicial custody since 22.07.2019 and the case i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... soil which according to the prosecution case was the place utilized for burying the dead body. He further submitted that the murder was committed in a very pre-planned and calculated manner and the circumstantial evidence is very clinching and even though the DNA profiling report of occipital bone and broken parts of cervical vertebrae with soil remnants and parietal bone fragment did not yield any result but in view of the available materials on record, the complicity of the petitioner in the crime is clearly borne out and when the earlier bail application was rejected on merit on 03.08.2020 and the petitioner moved for bail in the trial Court on 28.09.2020, which came to be rejected on 12.10.2020, in absence of any change in the circumstances, the bail application of the petitioner should be rejected. Mr. S.S. Das, learned Senior Advocate for the informant also vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and contended that there was motive behind the commission of crime, the petitioner was last seen in the company of the deceased, the petitioner made extra judicial confession before the labourer whose services were utilised for digging the soil for burying the dead body. The petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... giving of more materials can be a ground for reconsideration. The question comes up for consideration is whether successive bail application can be entertained and a different view can be taken on the already existing materials when the earlier bail application was rejected on merit, merely because some documents/statements available in the case record were not taken into account. In the case of Kalyan Chandra Sarkar (supra), Hon ble Supreme Court held as follows: Before concluding, we must note though an accused has a right to make successive applications for grant of bail, the Court entertaining such subsequent bail applications has a duty to consider the reasons and grounds on which the earlier bail applications were rejected. In such cases, the Court also has a duty to record what are the fresh grounds which persuade it to take a view different from the one taken in the earlier applications. In the case of Jogia @ Jogendra Jena, I have held as follows: Successive bail applications are maintainable but there has to be material change in the fact situation and not mere cosmetic change. Successive bail applications on the same grounds which were available to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rabad indicates that the sources of exhibit A (occipital bone and broken parts of cervical vertebrae with soil remnants) and exhibit B (parietal bone fragment) did not yield any DNA profiles and no opinion could be furnished, it neither helps the prosecution nor the accused. The other grounds are just repetitions which were earlier urged in the previous bail application. The 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. statements of Chaitnaya Kuanr Amit Swain, Sanjib Panda are very relevant to prima facie show the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of crime. The statements of Dr. Birendra Kuma Padhi and Geeta Mohanty prima facie indicate as to how the petitioner by changing his name as Bibhuti Panda, was employed as a cook in their institution i.e. DIET- ITC, Sunarimanda from November 2011 to June 2015. The motive behind the commission of offence is prima facie apparent from the statements of the informant Bijayini Mishra, Purnima Mishra, Bhabani Shankar Mishra, Prasant Kumar Hota and Laxmi Priya Mishra to the extent that the petitioner had taken cash of ₹ 1,60,000/- and gold ornaments from the deceased but when the deceased asked him to refund the same because of its necessity in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
